How can Shrub attack Iran without Congress' ok?

[booley]

Ok, probably a dumb question but bear with me.

I know Shrub wants to attack Iran. and I know he has attacked Iran.

But can Shrub declare war on Iran and invade like he has done with Iraq without Congress giving him some kind of ok? And how likely is that?

IF he could, then how? Would he just say that the Congressional resolution that allowed him into Iraq also lets him attack Iran?

And if not, would there be any legal repercussions?

I am just confused because it seems that the Republicans losing control of Congress would have put brakes on Shrub attacking Iran, not speeded up the proccess as it seems to have.

[Taverner]

1. Bushie has been violating the Constitution since he was sworn in

Something like legality isn't going to stop him now

[BuyingThyme]

2. He's a Nazi. They don't believe in Congress.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. He can't.

Although Congress can choose to look the other way.

[niyad]

4. this maladministration is operating under their stated assumption that they are, in fact, the total

and complete dictators they want to be. bush is "the decider", chinstrap says nothing is going to change his mind, and the AG says NOBODY better question him.

[Az]

5. Here's how it works

Place carrier group within range of Iranian Missiles.

Make speach stepping up the war on terra.

Surepticiously start poking Iran in the chest. That is attack their consulates in Iraq. Send drones into their air space. Basically goad them into striking back.

Once they strike back site it as them initiating conflict. The president has the power to call for short term conflict. It is long term conflict that he cannot initate without the congress. Use the incident as an excuse to bomb the snot out of Iran. Use impetus to build consensus in the public for the new war. Drag the Dems along as they silently comply to save their seats.

[no_hypocrisy]

10. Modus operandi: Self defense means no need to discuss this

with Congress.

[blm]

17. That's what I expect, too. Dems negotiating IWR got Iran and Syria taken off the table

in exchange for their support. But, of course, Bush wouldn't care about the way ANY resolution was worded, aa his signing statements prove.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

27. Or lie and blame Iran for an attack that they didn't do.

[thereismore]

6. preemptively. nt

[BayCityProgressive]

7. Because Congress isn't really in control

of the country. The GOP and the corporations are.

[Zhade]

29. BZZZT! So sorry - judges were looking for "preventative".

(Just teasin' ya a bit, and making the point that attacking Iran would NOT be preemptive, as there's no credible threat to preempt.)

[Hissyspit]

8. War Powers Act (Resolution):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution

The War Powers Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-148) limits the power of the President of the United States to wage war without the approval of Congress. The War Powers Act of 1973 is also referred to as the War Powers Resolution (Sec. 1).

- snip -

Provisions
The purpose of the War Powers Resolution is to ensure that Congress and the President share in making decisions that may get the U.S. involved in hostilities. Portions of the War Powers Resolution require the President to consult with Congress prior to the start of any hostilities as well as regularly until U.S. armed forces are no longer engaged in hostilities (Sec. 3); and to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities if Congress has not declared war or passed a resolution authorizing the use of force within 60 days (Sec. 5(b)). Following an official request by the President to Congress, the time limit can be extended by an additional 30 days (presumably when "unavoidable military necessity" requires additional action for a safe withdrawal).


History
Under the Constitution, war powers are divided. Congress has the power to declare war and raise and support the armed forces (Article I, Section 8), while the president is Commander in Chief (Article II, Section 2). It is generally agreed that the Commander in Chief role gives the president power to repel attacks against the United States and makes him responsible for leading the armed forces. During the Korean and Vietnam wars, the United States found itself involved for many years in situations of intense conflict without a declaration of war. Many Members of Congress became concerned with the erosion of congressional authority to decide when the United States should become involved in a war or the use of armed forces that might lead to war. The Senate and the House of Representatives achieved the 2/3 majority required to pass this joint resolution over President Nixon's veto on November 7, 1973. Presidents have submitted 118 reports to Congress as a result of the War Powers Resolution, although only one (the Mayaguez situation) cited Section 4(a)(1) or specifically stated that forces had been introduced into hostilities or imminent danger.

Congress invoked the War Powers Resolution in the Multinational Force in Lebanon Resolution (P.L. 98-119), which authorized the Marines to remain in Lebanon for 18 months. In addition, P.L. 102-1, authorizing the use of U.S. armed forces concerning the Iraqi aggression against Kuwait, stated that it constituted specific statutory authorization within the meaning of the War Powers Resolution.

On November 9, 1993, the House used a section of the War Powers Resolution to state that U.S. forces should be withdrawn from Somalia by March 31, 1994; Congress had already taken this action in appropriations legislation. More recently, war powers have been at issue in former Yugoslavia/Bosnia/Kosovo, Iraq, Haiti, and in responding to terrorist attacks against the U.S. after September 11, 2001. After combat operations against Iraqi forces ended on February 28, 1991, the use of force to obtain Iraqi compliance with U.N. resolutions remained a War Powers issue, until the enactment of P.L. 107-243, in October 2002, which explicitly authorized the President to use force against Iraq, an authority he exercised in March 2003, and continues to exercise for military operations in Iraq.

[citygal]

9. When I was studying for the bar exam, this area of constitutional law was summed up like this:

The President has the power to move troops and Congress has the power to declare war.

[Az]

19. The prez can shoot things

But to put boots on the ground requires the congress.

[CBGLuthier]

11. They already authorized it

The passed the law on 9/14/01 authorizing the president to attack any nation that he could connect to 911. So he just has to make yet another bullshit connection and it's go time.

That law must be rescinded otherwise he will be able to do it.

Also, the old war powers act allowed for the president to wage war without a formal declaration from congress for , I think it was 90 days.

[Mandate My Ass]

12. Same way he ordered domestic spying w/o a warrant

Just have Gonzo write a secret memo saying he can, whether that is the law or not...(which it never is).

[Amy6627]

13. He thinks that he can attack anywhere anytime under the guise of

the war on terror!

[H2O Man]

14. While he cannot "declare war"

on Iran, he can "respond" to what he views as a threat to Americans' safety. As Commander in Chief, the US Presidents have always been recognized as having the ability to react to emergency situations. Of course, in this situation, it requires Iran to do something -- or be accused of doing something -- that poses such a "threat."

[John Q. Citizen]

15. We never declared war on Iraq. That declare war stuff is so 1st half of the

20th century.

[in_cog_ni_to]

16. He THINKS the IWR gives him Carte Blanche to attack any country at any time if HE believes they're

a "terrorist" nation. It doesn't. He's declared himself dictator and forgot to inform Congress he did.

[Norquist Nemesis]

18. He's going to say, "As CIC, I'm protecting our troops!"

Just watch!

It seems to me that a lot of people are equating attacking Iran with a groundwar campaign. Lobbing missiles from naval ships is going to be spun as "protecting the troops and Americans in Iraq that the Iranian government is covertly seeking to murder through their terror networks."

He won't follow with a groundwar incursion but will keep it coming in from the air.

[solara]

20. Joe Biden told Condi for the record that the Exec Branch

did NOT have the authority to go into Iran and that if they over stepped their bounds there would be a Constitutional Crisis and that he, Joe Biden, would be leading them. That was said at the end of the Senate hearing with Condi last week. I am sorry I don't have a thread.

So we will see if and how he makes good on his threat.. but he and Sen Webb were NOT happy.

[onenote]

21. War Powers Resolution

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/warpower.htm

To elaborate: No, chimpy cannot "declare war" on Iran. Only the Congress can declare war. However, the War Powers Resolution (aka War Powers Act) indicates that the President may "introduce" US forces into hostilities overseas pursuant not only to a declaration of war, but also pursuant to a specfic statutory autorization, or in the case of a national emergency created by an attack on the US or its armed forces.

The law provides that "in every possible instance" the pres is supposed to "consult" with Congress before introducing armed forces into hostilities. If troops are introduced without a prior declaration of war or statutory authorization, the president is supposed to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours. Congress then has 60 days to authorize the president's action or extend the timetable or the president must terminate the use of troops. Or COngress, by affirmatively adopting a concurrent resolution, can force the president to terminate the use of the armed forces.


That's what the statute says. Its application and enforcement has been, to put it mildly, been spotty over the years.

[uppityperson]

22. It depends on the definition of "attack"

I think of it sort of like seasons. It is now winter here in the northern hemisphere. The amount of time the sun is up is longer, but it still getting colder. There is a lag between what Mr.bush can do and being able to stop him from figuring out how to do whatever he wants.

[Akoto]

23. By twisting the law.

Declaring war requires the approval of Congress. Therefore, he won't do that. He'll goad Iran into making the first move, and justify anything he does in response as retaliation for their "aggression".

[librechik]

24. "it is easier to apologize than ask permission"

yeah, and if you don't even bother to apologize, and shame those who think you should, even better!

[Whoa_Nelly]

25. It is unfortunate that Congress passed PL107-40 [S. J. RES. 23] 0n 9/18/2001

It gave Bush a blank check to declare pre-emeptive strike for the "War on Terror".

http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/terrorism/sjres23.es.html


JOINT RESOLUTION
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and

Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and

Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and

Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and

Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it


Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.


Approved September 18, 2001.

[ieoeja]

26. War Powers Act

The War Powers Act of 1973 has always been interpreted to give the president the authority to introduce US military forces into hostilities for 60 days without other prior congressional authority ("other" than the blanket War Powers Act itself). The act in its entirety can be read here:

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/warpow.html.

The pertinent section is even highlighted. I don't know if congress intended this act to give blanket authority to the president. I thought it was written to rein in Nixon in '73. Hard to say as the highlighted section makes a reference to section 4(A)1, and if you read section 4(A)1 you will discover that section 4(A)1 says ... nothing. The entire section forms one giant sentence fragment!

And if you don't finish a sentence, have you actually said anything?

This has to be one of the most poorly written laws I have ever seen. And this has granted every president beginning with Nixon with the power to use the military as the president sees fit (for 60 days or until congress acts)?!?

[Zhade]

28. Illegally.

Hey, you asked.